Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-03 09:25:22 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 98F4E15C5949B7B0DC9C3CD5308F9A446119C5AD6161C282D53E083BF665D555
Participant Details

Original Note:

Not only did the International Court of Justice offer only advice here, experts note that the court does not recognise its own decisions as binding precedent. See Oxford Journal of International Dispute Settlement, Vol. 2, No. 1 (2011), page 12. https://academic.oup.com/jids/article/2/1/5/843965

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1819522845829222657
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 98F4E15C5949B7B0DC9C3CD5308F9A446119C5AD6161C282D53E083BF665D555
  • createdAtMillis - 1722677122751
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 181952284582922265798F4E15C5949B7B0DC9C3CD5308F9A446119C5AD6161C282D53E083BF665D555